Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : IDT *(idtc) following this new issue?* -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: CYBERKEN who wrote (9873)	6/24/1999 8:24:00 AM
From: Hawaii60	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 30916

hmmm. well We will have to see if we can get him early readmittance. Surely if he promisses not to do it again and follow the rules, no?

To: CYBERKEN who wrote (9873)	6/24/1999 8:30:00 AM
From: Hawaii60	Respond to of 30916

IDTC in the CATTO Report! by: <Picture: Sorry, I'm not available> JohnnyRottenest 85368 of 85377IDTC was selected as one of 11 stocks! More on the bond market, hte market, the DOJ etc-a great daily source sites.netscape.net

To: CYBERKEN who wrote (9873)	6/24/1999 8:52:00 AM
From: md1derful	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 30916

Was that really Mr. Pinks name and did he really work for that investing firm..do I sense a conflict of interest here??? Do the other pinkettes sense it also!!! Would love to hear the pink one's response to his occupation

To: CYBERKEN who wrote (9873)	6/24/1999 9:01:00 AM
From: Zeev Hed	Respond to of 30916

Cyberken, I was also asked by Nasdaq to let the thread know of his suspension. If I may add, these type of occurrences are the results of diverging from discussing the subject at hand to discussing the posting personalities. I believe that if a person wants to stay anonymous in its posting, it is their right, and if we concentrate on analyzing issues rather than motives we will not run into such events of personal harassment. Not that I particularly like Pink's style of debate, the majority of his the posts are simply not to the point, and he in essence draw the less disciplined into volley of verbal pugilism. Here and there, however, he reveals his fundamental reasons for a position on a stock, and those reasons are the one that should be debated, not who he is and what he does. All, IMHO. Zeev